Art. 2004.Annulment For Vices of Substance; Peremption of Action

Article 2004 supplies the second category of nullity action, the one for vices of substance. Where a vice of form under Article 2002 attacks a procedural defect in how the judgment was rendered, a vice of substance attacks the integrity of the judgment itself: it was obtained through fraud or ill practices, a broad phrase Louisiana courts have applied to conduct that deprived a party of a fair opportunity to present a case, even conduct that falls short of outright fraud.

Paragraph B sets the deadline, and it is important to read closely: the action must be brought within one year of the discovery, by the plaintiff bringing the nullity action, of the fraud or ill practices. That one-year clock runs from discovery, not from the date of the original judgment, so a fraud that stays hidden for years can still be challenged once uncovered, so long as the nullity suit follows within a year of that discovery.

This one-year period is a peremption, not a prescription, and the distinction matters. Prescription is Louisiana's ordinary limitations concept, and a prescriptive period can be interrupted or suspended in certain circumstances, effectively pausing or restarting the clock. Peremption is firmer: it extinguishes the right to bring the nullity action itself once the period runs, without the interruption or suspension that can rescue a prescribed claim. A party relying on this ground cannot count on an argument that would toll an ordinary prescriptive deadline; once a year passes from discovery, the action of nullity for fraud or ill practices is gone. Paragraph C softens the stakes of the fight itself by letting the court award reasonable attorney fees to whichever party prevails in the action.